Reading mode: Light Dark

Tamron 70-300mm 4.0-5.6 LD Macro AF or Sigma 70-300 F4,0-5,6 DG APO Makro

Go to last post
C

Cecco

Leading Member
Messages
925
Reaction score
6
Location
DE
Looking for a 300 mm zoom lens. As the KM 100-300 APO is quite expensive now on Ebay, I'm thinking about an alternative from Tamron (new about 140 €) or Sigma (new about 200 €).

IMHO the Tamron is an older design made for analog. Funnily it is only 436g vs. 530g for the Sigma. Probably Tamron brings a new version for digital soon.

There are different reports on the web about the Sigma. Some say it is sharp till 200 mm but gets worse above, others say, if you stop it down 1 or 2f it is pretty sharp still at 300 mm.

I've read close to nothing about the Tamron so far.

Can anyone comment on the lenses and probably compare them to the KM 100-300 APO?

Thanks,

Cecco
 
I bought a used Tamron 70-300mm 4.0-5.6 LD Macro for my old Maxxum 5 (for about 30 $), but I rarely used it. It's not very sharp, the autofocus is slow and unusable under non-perfect light. It has very strong chromatic aberrations above 200mm. Can't recommend it at all.

There's a non-apo version of the Minolta 100-300 that is much better than the Tamron and less expensive than the 100-300 apo (bought mine for 100 $ or so). It's not perfect but sharpness is OK stopped down 1 step. IMHO the best value for the money.
 
I don't know much about the Tamron, but I just bought the Sigma DG APO, and couldn't be happier. There's a lot of info about the lens here on dpreview, as well as dyxum - I haven't seen any negative comments about it yet. Here are a couple of macro examples, all at 300mm, straight from the camera except resized:









--
Keith
Canon Powershot SD300 & KM 5D
http://www.pbase.com/themitty/
 
Tamron is expecting to release the Di version sometime in May. I had one on order at Adoram, but I got the LD for $159.95 with the 28-80 thrown in. The 28-80 is a cheaper lens with plastic mount. According to Tamron, the new 70-300 will have a plastic lens mount wrapped in steel, and the only improvement is a new coating on the lens.

I got the lenses yesterday and didn't have time to do anything with them.
 
So the tamron doesn't seem to be an alternative for me.

The Sigma got a very good rating at dyxum.com. But it is only from 2 reviews. One review seems to be from banned user minoltamaniac, who also stated in the dyxum forum:

"The Sigma 70-300APO DG is an excellent lens. I have compared it to the legendary Minolta f4 beercan and it easily holds it's own in contrast, sharpness, and clarity. It focuses as fast or faster and is less prone to ca and flare than the beercan. The bokeh is also pretty good. I have six lenses in the 70-210/300 range and I really like the Sigma 70-300 APO DG. The 200-300mm range is completely usable. The lens is also usable wide open and suffers from little distortions. The 1:2 macro from 200-300mm is very nice and overall this is a very fun lens lens to use that can produce excellent results. "

And in another posting:

"In my testing I have not noticed much of a loss of quality above 200mm with the 70-300 APO DG Macro. I think this is one of the improvements of latest APO DG version. I think the extra coatings and element design for digital has increased the performance at the long end of this lens. Another big improvement is the 200-300mm macro instead of just 300. The exterior of the latest version is really sweet as well."

Sounds too good to be true ... ? But if this is right, I wouldn't hesitate to go for the Sigma, and save half the prize in compare to a used KM 100-300 APO.

On the other hand, here are some quotes from the photozone test of the Sigma ( http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_70300_456/index.htm ):

MTF (resolution): ...At 200mm and 300mm the center performance remains on a very good level but the border quality starts to suffer here. At 200mm it helps to stop down a little but at 300mm the border quality is dismal at f/5.6 and it doesn't really recover a little till f/11.

Chromatic Aberrations: ... At 70mm the issue is basically non-existent and at 200mm it's still quite well controlled. However, at 300mm the problem exceeds 1.5 pixels which is rather critical.

That's what I've already found elsewhere: Up to 200 mm it is very good, above corner sharpness and CA is much worse.

Well, that would leave same argument to investigate a bit more in a used KM 100-300 APO probably.

What do you think, who is right. Or is this just within the quality bandwidth you can get from Sigma. minoltamaniac got an exceptional good one, photozone got a lemon?

Cecco
 
Thanks for posting the pictures.

They look nice, but to say anything about sharpness and CA a 100% crop would be mandatory.

Cecco
 
http://www.pbase.com/themitty/image/59417806

http://www.pbase.com/themitty/image/59417807

Both are at 300mm, handheld at 1/125th, iso 800, unprocessed.

I was also looking at the 100-300 apo. The deciding factors for me were the macro capabilities (1:2), the added range and the price. I think the 100-300 apo is a great lens, but it costs a little more, has less range, no macro, and is only readily availbale used, which means you don't necessarily know what you're getting. That said, I don't think you can go wrong with either lens.

Here's a link to a thread I posted last week about the two lenses, might be helpful in your decision:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1035&message=18168694

--
Keith
Canon Powershot SD300 & KM 5D
http://www.pbase.com/themitty/
 
Any zoom lens has sweetspots. From my experience the Sigma is an excellent lens especially for the cash $200!

Reviews are all reletive. Comparing one apect of the lens to the other, and one reviewers subjective nature.

Here is a shot taken looking away from the sunset at 300mm 1/500 f10
Top is a resize of the full frame.

The tower is 4.5 to 5 miles away. The details of it straucture are getting to the 1-2 pixel width. Below are two 100% crop copnverted in ACR no adjustments (ACR's default exposure was a bit light, but I choose not to correct it for this example. These are from the same orginal RAW file.

The last crop is a tower another .5 to 1 mile away on the edge of the frame. There is some softening.. but the structure is still resolved enough for sharpening in PP to tighten it up.







--
Ken H.
KM FiveDee - Kit 18-70- SG 70-300 APO
 
I bought the Tamron. Returned it- soft as !. Got the Sigma which is better than the Canon equivalent. Sharp, good contrast, almost zero fringeing and good color.In the DG version though the old one is still better than the Canon 75-300mm (yep! and I'm a Canon fan). Sigma is good, but dont ruin your purchase and your lens by getting it by courier or through the mail
--
narayana
 
@007peter: These pictures indeed look great. The KM 75-300 is very cheap on ebay, and it usually rates similar than the KM 100-300 and both rate much lower than the KM 100-300 APO.
So there a new alternative. I'm a bit puzzled.

@ keith: Thanks for the pics. Btw. the second link seems to point to the wrong picture.

The big question with the sigma still is, whether corner sharpness (and PF) is so much worse at 300 mm in compare to 200 mm. If you like to make me (and probably others, that are interested in that lense) a favour, it would be very nice, if you could make 2 testshots (on tripod without AS) of some textpage at 200 and 300 mm and post 100% crops from the middle and from the border, ideally wide open and as well stopped down to f11 f.e.

Tell us the distance camera - textpage you've used and someone else owning the 100-300 APO (Rich?) or the KM 75-300 (007peter?) could do the same test, so can we see, how they compare.

Btw. Rich said the AF on the 100-300 APO would be very slow. How are the Sigma and the KM 75-300 performing.

Cecco
 
This is one of those lens that make Sigma one of the favorites in low price lens. It's just exceptional throughout it's range of 70-300mm, and not huge and heavy as some.
 
I don't have time to do the crops right now, but here are the untouched samples (sorry about the white balance!)

200mm, f11:
http://www.pbase.com/themitty/image/59429496

200mm, f5:
http://www.pbase.com/themitty/image/59429498

300mm, f5.6:
http://www.pbase.com/themitty/image/59429499

300mm, f11:
http://www.pbase.com/themitty/image/59429500

If anything, it seems sharper at 300mm. I don't see a ton of dropoff in the corners (some DOF on the 200mm since the page is not completely straight - it's bent outward on the lower left side of the page).

One other note about corner softness at that distance - I would think in most situations, you're not going to be concerned with how sharp it is in the corner, since your subject is often in the center for telephoto shots.

Hope this helps.
--
Keith
Canon Powershot SD300 & KM 5D
http://www.pbase.com/themitty/
 
Thanks very much Keith.
Keith Schmidt said:
If anything, it seems sharper at 300mm. I don't see a ton of
dropoff in the corners (some DOF on the 200mm since the page is not
completely straight - it's bent outward on the lower left side of
the page).
Click to expand...
I agree, I don't see that much difference as well. The not completely straight page makes more difference than the decreasing sharpness of the lens.
Keith Schmidt said:
One other note about corner softness at that distance - I would
think in most situations, you're not going to be concerned with how
sharp it is in the corner, since your subject is often in the
center for telephoto shots.
Click to expand...
I agree too, the center is more important.

If you have a look at the MTF charts from photodo
http://www.photodo.com/prod/lens/detail/SiAF70-300_4-56APO-787.shtml
http://www.photodo.com/prod/lens/detail/MiAF100-300_45-56A-357.shtml

there seems to be a tremendous drop in contrast from center to corner on the Sigma at 300/5.6 (bottom chart, bottom lines).

I suspected that would be much more visible than it is on your pictures.

I'm now leaning towards a new Sigma.

Cecco
 
I recently ordered from Adorama the Sigma 17-70 DC and the 70-300 APO DG Macro as my travel lenses. I should receive them next week - I'll let you know what I think of these lenses next weekend.

If you are still looking for additional comments and reviews on either of these lenses, I suggest you look/search on both the Canon and Nikon SLR Lens forums on this site.

Just a comment - I spend too much time agonizing over lens selection. I'm always looking for the perfect solution which is for the most part impossible. There's always some new lens or one more review to read etc. I suggests you do a reasonable amount of research, make up your mind, pull the trigger, and don't look back. I wish I could follow my own advice.
--
Thanks, Ed
Torrance, CA
 
Cecco said:
Btw. Rich said the AF on the 100-300 APO would be very slow. How are the Sigma and the KM 75-300 performing.
Click to expand...
I like my KM 75_300, but the AF between 200-300 is slow, while 75-200 is very fast. For all my bird shots, I "auto-focus" around 150mm, get an AF lock, then zoom it into 300mm. This is how I was able to capture all the Bird-in-Flight.

By the way, ALL 300mm ZOOM LENS are kind of SLOW.
There is simply TOO MUCH TRAVEL to the 300mm range.
The only way around this is to design a lens with INTERNAL FOCUS.

I had hope Tamron would come out with a 75-300 [IF], unfortunately,
its the same lens design with new coating.
I DON'T THINK YOU WILL BE 100% SATISFIED BY ANY ZOOM 300MM.
If you want speed, you should buy the $1000 PRIME:
The best zoom lens on Minolta is the 70_200 SSM.
That sonic motor makes the zooming much faster and more reliable.

PS - I did try a 100-300APO in the store. I find the AF speed to be fairly fast, but I was tracking people in the store, not birds.

I recommend Sigma for Macro, but its quality control sucks, many unsatisfied ebay buyers. I'm not fond of the Tamron 75-300, most hate it. I would go with 75_300 b/c it is a great underated lens, but it is not APO. If you're rich, try to find the old 100-300 (non-D), that is the BEST 300mm zoom I've seen
 
I very curious on the Sigma 17-70 DC, what is the aperature?
I love my KM 28_75 F/2.8 with KM 75_300 combo.
We should get together sometimes and compare them all locally.
 
While I generally prefer lighter lens, I find that Telephoto @300mm require a heavier lens to make it stable. My KM 75_300 is TOO LIGHT.
Not a problem @75, but a huge probelm @300mm
Looking through my viewfinder @300mm, it bounce all over.
Thanks to AS, otherwise, this lens isn't usable handheld.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top